broadcast. tonight two questions, one, the future of electronic money lishing, the two the competition between the ipad and the kindle, helping us to sort it out ken aulette of the "new yorker" magazine and the author of google. who's right about whether people want a dedicated book reader. >> i think steve jobs is right. and i think publishers think he's right too. i mean what the publishers are doing, belatedly and too late, by the way, i mean they've been late to this party. but i think what traditional publishers are now feverishly working on is to try and make the book itself the ebook a multimedia device. >> rose: also michael end of "politico", what he writes in playbook every morning on-line is what a lot of people in washington are reading. >> well, charlesie, everybody in the political media, broadcasting, financial community wakes up and we all want to know the

same ten stories. we all want to know what rahm said on charlie rose last night what vice president biden's op ed in "the washington post" is. who dick cheney's going to endorse, what the news nugget in david remick's book is, but to find those ten stories we have to read a thousand stories. so the idea of playbook is we do that for you. we pull out what people are going to be buzzing about, what people are going to be talking b what is going to be booked on cable. what is going to drive conversation on radio and put it out there for what the times call your blackberry breakfast. >> rose: we conclude way third journalist alan risbridger of the guardian. >> we need to stop and think. i think journalistically i'm not a pessimist. i think what the-- web has done is miraculous in terms of information. and that newspapers should want to be open and collaborative in what they do. because that's the way the internetworks. and so i think it's a very

profound statement journalistically to want to put a universal barrier between you and the way the rest of the world is going to work. >> rose: a personal note, i had the delightful experience this morning of spending it in the first grade at collegiate school with my god son carter burden ernl the fourth. he made me this brace let and i promised him i would show it to you on television tonight. that and this cup from collegiate, thank you, carter. tonight we have ken aulette, michael enand alan risbridger coming up. >> rose: funding for charlie rose has been funded by: captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york

city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: technology has transformed the way we communicate and the way we consume. to listen to music there's itunes. to watch video there's youtube. to stay if touch with people there's facebook. to read books, there's the kindle. now there's also the ipad which went on sale this month. >> amazon has done a great job of pioneering this functionality with their kindle. and we're going to stand on their shoulders and go a bit further. so this is what a kindle looks like, i'm sure many of you have used one. this is reading a book on the new ipad. it's really nice and our new app is called ibooks. now ibooks has a book shelf, looks like this where you have all your books, if you want to read one, you just saw what it looks like, terrific. you can go into portrait and

see both pages if you would like. and in addition to having your book shelf and being able to read books there's a button in the upper left corner of the book shelf which is the store. and we've created the new ibook store. >> rose: the electronic books industry is thriving. they could eventually account for 20 to 25% of all books sold. who will prevail. apple or amazon, or perhaps another company all together. how will this affect the publishing industry. how will it change the way we read? joining me now is ken aulette, his new article in "the new yorker" magazine explores all of these questions. it is titled apple versus amazon, can the ipad conquer the kindle and save the book publishing industry. i'm pleased to have ken aulette back at this table. welcome. >> thanks, charlie. so here it is. publish or perish. can the ipad topple the kindle and save the book business, can it?

>> no, i don't believe in saviours. and but if i were in a business that felt like it was in trouble as many traditional media companies feel they are, you are constantly looking for saviours. and they should be looking for new ways of doing things. and the ipad opens up some opportunities for them. but it does-- of course the multimedia device unlike the kindle. but the other thing it does for them which they feel saves them, they have been terribly alarmed that amazon was gaining a monopoly over ebooks. 80% of all the electronic books are published by amazon. not just for the kindl-- kindle but on other devices. and they were terrified that amazon not only would have a market share, but amazon was subsidizing the price of a book. they were paying let's say 13 to 14 dollars a book and selling it for 9.99. they were worried what amazon would then do with total market share was keep

on reducing those prices as is the tendency in the on-line world. and then they would be stuck and they would be losing their shirts. so ipad coming along and agreeing to allow the publishers to set the price gives the publishers new leverage over amazon. and now google would be coming into the market probably this summer as google official said to me. and that will give them increased leverage. so in that sense, they feel like it's a saviour for them and it gives them some leverage over amazon. >> rose: so it will be apple versus amazon versus google. >> and don't forget barnes & noble. >> rose: and sony has a reader. >> and at the consumer electronic show there were a dozen ebook readers. so everyone is going to try and jump into this business. so far the leader of the pack, i mean kindl has the market share now. but the newer version of the ipad that steve jobs displayed at, on january 27th as you just showed is a device that is very different than the kindle.

the kindle does one thing. it's dedicated reading device in black and white. the i pated-- ipad is to the just for reading. you could watch video on it, you could read books on it. you can do interactive books on it. it's in color. if you read a newspaper on a kindle you read one article at a time. if you read a newspaper on the ipad see the entire front page. you turn the pages this way, or back that way, if you press it like this you can see the whole story jump up. front page. >> rose: i want to get more into this. i just read something today or yesterday in the last couple of days that apple said it did not appreciate how large the market was for the ipad and that's why they're having to delay even sending them overseas for the global, you know, opening. is that right. >> i don't know. i'm suspicious. i mean i suspect they have had some, you know, glitches. at&t as a service provider is a glitch. there's always complaint about their service and

their ability to connect to the internet. i don't know, you know, amazon and apple share something in common. they're both fairly opaque companies. very hard to pen straigh straight-- penetrate. >> rose: as you know from my questioning of jeff bezo-- bezos on this show. >> which was last march. >> rose: will disclose nothing other than the wonders of the kindle. >> right. won't tell you how many they sell. won't tell publishers, you know, who the readers are or customers are. >> rose: but is the ipad a kindle killer in the end as some people have speculated? >> if bezos is wrong, that people, he believes that people want a dedicated reading device. if he's wrong about that and if, in fact, the ipad is-- is people want the multifujsality that an ipad presents, then bezos is going to be compelled, i think, to change the kindl and try and make it more like an apple, like an ipad. >> what are publishers

telling you about all this. >> publishers are thrilled that apple has gotten into the business and created competition for amazon. publishers are thrilled they feel right now that steve jobs has been easy to work with than jeff bezos and his teambeen have o far. but if you talk tthesic mu mpany peoplethey wouldn't have sd that about steve jobs. and they're thrilled that google is getting in the business and that barns and noble. >> rose: is it going to save the publishing business? >> i don't know. the publishing business is to the a high margin business. it's not a business that makes 30 plus profit margins the way google or microsoft do or apple does. it has been a steady business. the real worry that the publishers have, and this is a worry about electronic books be it on the ipad or on a kindle or the nook, the worry they have is what happens to book stores it. right now independent book stores which often is where the word of mouth from the

publishing industry comes, particularly for that first time novellist that mid list author who suddenly breaks out. and they're down a ten percent and shrinking dramatically. and how do they compete with an ebook. if you sell an erckbook, let's say you sell it for $13 under the new agency model that apple agreed to and forced amazon to agree to you sell that book-- . >> rose: you can to longer get books for 9.95 on amazon. >> ol books but new books are going to be in a range of prices but the price will be basically set by the publisher, at least initially. but the problem for the publisher is the book store. what happens to that book store when you can buy that ebook for 12, 13, 14 dollars, 11 dollars, 10 dollars, whatever the price, and you can't get a comparable book in a book store. how do you get the ebook in a bo store. so the book store is competinwith a 26 book that y can get for13 on amazon or apple. >> re: you wilbeto get some version of the

kindle as app on e i? >> you do now. >>e: you do now. eah, they havan app, amazon has an app, amazon bos s anapp on the . and which is a great thing beuse amazon rit now, one of their advantages, they have many more books th have rghly-- they ha roughly 460,000 boo&zks that areaila ave in ebook form. d that's growing apple haless tn 100,000 right now. but that will grow tool. but ghnowmazos the bigger selecti of ooks by 4 to 1. >> rose: what are readers going to like, is the question? who is right about whether people want a dedicated book reader. >> i think steve jobs is right. and i think publishers think he's right too it i mean what the publishers are doing, belatedly and too late, by the way, i mean they've been late to this party. but i think what traditional publishers are now feverishly working on is to try and make the book itself

the ebook a multimedia device, to add features to that book that don't now exist so if you do, if you have a book and let's say the ted kennedy book comes out. in the new ebook format you could press the multimedia section and watch his interviews with charlie rose. or you could watch teddy talking-- i'm sure you would, you might want to get a piece of it. but you can watch teddy doing other things german mark to the archives and read about things. you could listen to radio interviews with people. you can have interactive things where the authors are talking to you, right. but you make, and if you have children's book you can animate them. so you can create a different kind of book. what the publishers hope, and i don't know whether this will work. that if they do that, you they can actually charge you a premium price for that new multimedia ebook so they create another pricing structure, another revenue stream based on this new kind of book. >> rose: why did steve jobs

come to this later than he perhaps could have? the idea of putting books -- >> well, what he said a couple years ago and i quote him in that piece is that reading is dying and i wouldn't-- he basically suggested he wouldn't dare-- . >> rose: so what changed his mind, the kindle. >> there are two theories. >> rose: what? >> one theory is that the kindle changed his mind. he saw there was a nice business that amazon was creating. the other theory was just a fake it was a way to throw people off. >> rose: don't worry, i'm not coming in, boys, but i'm coming after. >> an when he says we're going to stand on the shoulders of amazon's kindle, he's standing on the neck and he's pressing down hard. >> rose: he say competitive guy. >> no, what makes you say that. he's just like jeff bezos. >> rose: competitive guy. with respect to jobs, where is he in his life and where is he in terms of how he sees these products that we all love. it took me five seconds to know i had to have an ipad

did you have one. >> no, because i'm going to wait for the 3g model. i will wait a month and do it. i still have my kindl. i like the kindle. i'm not complaining about it. >> rose: there is nothing to complain about. to be on a plane and be able to look at four or five different books, you could have a hundred but four or five is a great, you just throw it in your bag and know it is there. >> and also the fact that you then could go back. i recently was overseas and i wanted to read some books. and i literally on the kindle i was able to order books 60 secretaries later i'm getting downloaded on the back list, books published years ago. wonderful. but, you know-- . >> rose: the legacy of steve jobs. >> i think jobs is, my sense and from the people who are close to him that i talk to, my sense is that he's in a different place. >> rose: in his life. >> in his life. i mean here's a guy who faced death and seemingly survived. and thrived. >> rose: seemingly. >> seemingly. no one knows.

>> rose: he had a transplant and he's much better than he was. >> he much more an lated-- animated and looked better in this presentation since late january an has been active on-line and stuff like that. so thank god and it looks like steve jobs is back. >> rose: he is traveling a bit too. >> came here to make his pitch to the "new york times" and time inc. d heall street jal," he made a ve instructive speech at standford university several years ago. afr he had been diagnosed with pancreatic canr. and afr it appeared-- after he had been erat o told had was a success. and he spoutke aboeathn that speit was a veryc an 11 minute speecand he's not a man who divulges personal feelings very ofn. in is. >>ose: is this the commencent addss. >> the commencement addres to stdford. >> rose: the business scol. >> yeah, and in that speech heai death is the great leveler. and what it does is you know th everyone is gng t die, yourself included. so live each day as if it is

ur last day. d try and make a meaningful contrutio really eloqueneech. and it was clearly heartfelt fosomeone who had faced death. and i think tt experience d then the experience some years later finding o that in fact h was sick again and needed a liver transplant. what his friends say to me is that his w determined to be the kind of partner he wa't originally r the music companie where he was much more lligerent and actually saved them in some ways and stopped the illegal down loingd of music and offered people somng the music mpies should have been doing whicis singl recordpposed to you have to buy the entire cd. but i thin in ts case, he lkabout and sflinsd cos to be a partner ofraditional di publishers of newspapersnd try and helthem. if he mea that, and so far itppears he does t are stanng up applauding. and so of them are there, the head of simo& schuster s at the january 27th. >> re: wd shhat di say.

>> she just was thrilled. and he cup to h and saidre you pleased. she id more than pleased. i want one rig now,he said. e: are a publishers coopating with amaz or arsome not. >> well, they are all cooperatin azon is a very ant-- . >> rose: sthere is nobody, beuse i wento buy aook on amazon, tsaid it's not ouet. >>ell, what happens is is is the pubshs. the publishers, what do they ans indow the ebook which at when theyreas the hard cover book, they wait to release the e, just they rease to repiectheerback o dvd. so you can't necessarily get it but right now my unrstanding is that amazon, in fact,as a deal with a t publiers. the on o thathasn't made the same deal as the fivether big publhe has is random house which continueto a amazonto chge the 9.99 for books. that will pbably ince sales for randohouse. and a lot of their other

publishing peers are very up set with them about it. >> rose: this is your book, google, the end of the world as we know it. yove bee around the[ worl you were scheled to go to china. wh hpened? well, i was formed by my engsh publisher who does the foreign rights for me, the chinese-- s actually sent mtwo e-mas. the chinese puishe apologizedwe want to publish ken but the chines government doesn't want anything to do with anything that has google. and so the press is not allowed. and then there was an e-mail from someone in the press association, we're not allowed to cover mr. aulette when he is in beijing. >> rose: meaning we can't write reviews of the book. >> we can't write reviews, we can't cover him. >> rose: the chinese take google seriously. >> i'll say. what i did was just canceled it. i said i'm not coming. >> rose: where does that stand, that google-china conflict. >> google is not available in china mainland in terms of search.

>> rose: and what they did was they would direct your search to hong kong and the chinese are trying to block that. >> they are. >> rose: where does that stand. >> well, it's a cat and mouse game. it still conditions-- continues. and google i think stuck their neck out as other companies have not and said this is unacceptable. and i think they did it for two reasons. and i think the second reason, the two reasons really are worth mentioning. one is i think it was driven by sergei bryn whose family fled with him when he was 7 years 08d, the former soviet union and has a very strong feeling about human rights. he compromised in 2004 when they went to china. he has always been uncomfortable. he abstained when there was a vote in google in 2008 whether to stay in china when the shareholder urged them not to. and gave me this convoluted answer as to why. on the one hand this, on the other hand that. i think emotionally just, when they found out late last year that the chinese government were hacking, not just sringhe search results and not letting them look up the lai ma or tiananmen square onese

leaders but we hking into g-mai accounts and her google >> rose:nd themail accounts of people what had o posed the government. >> that and also actually we've since learned john parkoff wrote a good piece on the front page of the times last week, hacking into google software, basic software and its code. and why that's important, charlie, google is betting, one of its three big bets for the future is something they call cloud computing. which means don't buy microsoft's package of software for 400, 500 $300 a package. let us store all your information. we have all this data centers. let us store it in our cloud. and we'll follow you anywhere, it will be portable. but if you don't trust that that cloud information of yours is secure as you have no reason to be when you saw what happened in china, are you not going to be bet on cloud computing. will you go back to that package software that you control. so i think there was a business reason as well as an emotional rightous reason for doing what they did. >> rose: and where is microsoft in all of this?

>> bill gates has been quoted as saying that countries have a right to have their own laws and their own policies. and we're just visitors. >> rose: so they say look, whatever they want to do they can do. >> to my knowledge every business has done the same thing except google. >> rose: and what is the financial and economic consequences of making the decision that google did because of sergei's very strong passionate feeling about freedom. >> i think, you know, they have excluded themselves, they seem to have excluded themselves from the world's largest consumer market which was the original they originally compromised, to get in that market. >> rose: put a dollars and figures on it. >> it not a big market now. they do 70% of the world's-- world's searches. they do, which was a small, when google came in in 2004 they actually owned 4% which they subsequently sold. badui is a junior search

engine, now with the chinese sports's the dominant one. >> rose: has this caused any dissension among the top ranks of google at all in terms of eric schrit-- schmidt who is said to be opposed to the -- >> i don't believe that. >> rose: you believe he was in favor-- there is no difference. >> i believe that zrling aye brin drove this decision. i think larry would have sided with him, eric would have looked, he's a businessman. he would have looked at it. he would have talked it, but i cannot imagine. i have not, in the two and a half years i spent and all the time looking beyond those two and a half years, i never found except for the early days when herk was there when he joined in late 2001. and for that first year there was some tension. but i have not found that. they have a pretty smooth partnership rdz you and i together are now going to talk to a guy named michael en. "politico", cover story "new york times" magazine this coming weekend. you did a piece about him

too. >> he, one of the things i found, i was doing a piece on bomba and it came out in january. and one of the things i found is that all the people in the white house, they were keying their day and all the reporters of the white house were keying their day, many of them to what was in michael en's "politico" blog in the morning. michael engets up at 4:00 in the morning. he gets to the office at 5:00. and he writes by 7:00, he's pushed out what's happening. >> rose: he's read all the papers. >> he has read all of them. he's provided links to them, the headlines, the and basically earn is waking up to that. and that becomes the substitute for "the new york times", "the wall street journal". >> rose: deciding what they should read. >> and then dan five who is now the white house communications director, he was the deputy, dan five would told me starts calling allen at a o clock in the morning and sending him e-mails to try and get their spin out there wz. >> rose: i bet he calls him the night before too.

>> but michael enis talking to everybody. i don't think michael ensleeps. >> rose: so he is really the most what. >> well, he is-- he is as influential as any reporter covering the white house today. i mean you could argue-- . >> rose: in washington. >> well, he's very influential. everyone in washington is saying i'm sorry, whether he is the most influential, i don't know. i mean i think about someone like peter baker at the "new york times", the white house correspondent. i mean everyone in the white house and the press corp. reads this stuff and knows he's a step ahead of a lot of people in covering that. but michael enis covering-- he is setting the agenda for the day in all of washington. are you right, not just the white house. and that's extraordinary. and you see him, i mean he's a guy, people say he is like ralph nader, he is a mystery and stuff like that. >> rose: he is everywhere. >> he is a mystery to me. >> rose: you see him at parties and everywhere. when we come back, michael en, the subject of the cover story in "the new york times" magazine this sunday. stay with us.

we continue our conversation about the changing media landscape with a look at "politico", the web site and papers changes the way we consume political news. each more about 30,000 people wake up to an e-mail tip sheet called the playbook. joining me is michael en. "politico"'s chief white house correspondent, also the subject of a profile in this weekend's issue of "the new york times" magazine by mark leeb very much t is called the man the whix up to. joining me is ken aulette. first of all, welcome, mike. >> well, charlie, thank you for having me in. >> rose: how good an article is this. listen this, this is the first paragraph. before he goes to sleep between 11 and midnight dan phifi the white house communications director at this typically checks in by e-mail with the same reporter michael enwho is also the first reporter he could responds with after he wakes up at 4:20. what is it that has made you so essential. >> well, charlie, everybody in the political, media,

broadcasting, financial community wakes up and we all want to know the same ten story. we all want to know what rahm said on charlie rose last night. what vice president biden's op ed in "the washington post" is. who dick cheney's going to endorse. what the news nugget in david remick's book is. but to find those ten stories, we have to read a thousand stories. so the idea of playbook is we do that for you. we pull out what people are going to be buzzing about, what people are going to be talking about, what's going to be booked on cable. what is going to drive conversation on radio, and put it out there for what the times call your blackberry breakfast. >> rose: that's right. there are people in this piece who say they reach over and they grab their blackberry in bed, and then they check. how many people-- how many people put it together. and give us the sense of day-to-day activity, process. >> charlie, it is a very humble process.

a young man helps me with some. links to the major papers. and charlie, it started with an e-mail that i wrote to my friends and bosses, john harris and the founders of "politico" t was just a little e-mail that said what was in the papers that morning, what we should be covering, what i picked up overnight, what people were e-mailing me about. and as you know, as your viewers know, john harris, our editor in chief is a chatty fellow. and he mentioned that howard wolfson who was then with the hillary clinton campaign that i did this little cheat sheet for him in the morning. and howard said would you mind sending it to me. and i said sure. and then phil singer got it. and then the obama campaign heard about it and wanted it. then the mccain campaign heard about it and wanted it. the romney campaign and rnc and dnc and the white house and other reporters. and charlie, for the longest time, i knew people didn't like bcc, so for the longest time i sent this out, e-mail out individually to everyone

of these people who would ask for it. and it was taking half an hour just to send it out. one day i said to people, you know, it's going to come as a group e-mail but you will get it half an hour earlier, and they said sure. and so it is a way to eaves drop on what i'm telling john and jim. my friends in boston. and we changed it very little from that. one of the big premises of "politico", charlie, is the reporters are an awful lot more interesting in a bar, at church, at a softball game than they are in the paper. the idea of playbook and of "politico" more broadly is this is a way to eaves drop on the conversation, the reading ben smith's blog is like writing-- . >> rose: your schedule, you go to bed at what time and get up at what time. do you ever sleep. >> you know, jim-- my north star says a healthy person needs 6 hours. try do-to-do that we start around 3, we try to get it out before the morning shows. we cheat sometimes a little bit on weekends occasionally we'll have a brunch edition. but the idea is to get it to

people before they're consumed by the information of the day. before they are bombarded with the, all the white noise that assaults us during a day. a time when they can get a break from the partisanship, get a break from shouting and look at a product that gives them-- gives both sides. and does in a way that is easy to just click through. you know blackberry you don't have to scroll, you can just with the space bar you can go down screen by screen, people call it their playbook button it is a way to click through and see what is going to be driving news that day. when i was at the "washington post" if i woke up late i used to read just maureen daud and al cayman's column because i knew if i read maury -- maureen and ted, i i would have something interesting toy-to-say. and playbook is an extension of that. if you have gotten through "politico" you can cheat through your first meeting or your first phone call or your first tv hit. >> i think mike is a little

modest here in that they are not saying what is going to drive the news that day. mike is actually helping determine what is going to drive the news that day in his blog every morning. because people are seeing it is an early warning system, everyone is reading it in the campaign, mccame people and romney people. >> rose: they are going to respond to what he says. >> oh my god this is what he saying or plague it is not just links to stories that appear in papers and on television around the world and the u.s., it's also what press conferences are asked, who is appearing in public. so it becomes an incredibly valuable intelligence tool for people in public life. >> rose: how much of his appeal or how much are people satisfied by the notion that are you going to tell white house is eating with whom, whose birthday it is, who is getting married, and sort of what is happening in terms of the social life of the people that washington cares about. >> we do a little bit of

that. because it is a little like the old weekly paper that used to say what the sermon was or used to say who was visiting that weekend. washington, charlie, ken, as you know is a small town. "politico" washington. and it's bipartisan. people know, i have friends on both sides of the aisle. and in this small community n this insider community that we cover relentlessly, if phil singer has a baby f kevin madden gets a new job, that's news and people want to know about it. and people across the aisle want to be able to talk about it. and so we give them a little of that. i try to be a human algorithm and know what my readers want. know how much sugar they want. foe how much meat they want. know exactly how much sports they want. everything in it is built to respond to our readers. there is a little business blink or business burst at the bottom because someone told me if i were to give them the top ceo headline of the day they wouldn't have to read the "the wall street journal". i said don't do that still read the "the wall street journal". i will put in a ceo headline

for you. the sports blink is there because on the bush cheney campaign they wanted college football scores. so everything there is because people wanted every day, i tweak it just a bit to respond to what people want because it will serve them when they wake up. >> the other thing that mike does, i think s that people like mike. and mike is probably one of the few institutions where people in traditional media are in the saying we want to charge for our concept. reporters are desperate to appear on "politico" and be linked because they feel like they're made that they know everyone is reading them if they work for most papers they don't think everyone is reading it. >> rose: mike certifys that they matter by saying something about it. >> but also what mike does and people like mike and it really matters. people will talk to him. people will share information with him because they feel he doesn't-- he's not hitting people over the head with a 2 x 4. he is not settling grudges on the side and that is kind of important. >> where is the breakdown, you wanted to respond to that remark. >> you know, part of the theory of playbook is that

it used to be that the washington conversation, the washington debate, narrative was dictated by the front pages of national papers by evening newscasts. these are still important. but the debate, the conversation is also driven by a million tweets, phone calls, e-mails, cable hits. so we try to assemble that to figure out what people are going to be talking about, to know what they are going to need to know to cheat their way through their conversation. we often have people say you know, i was going put my boss on tv and because i saw this clip i knew what he was going to be hit with. >> rose: axelrod who you constantly talk about as well complained to-- about the intrigue pathology of washington and said he missed chicago. he preferred living in a place where people don't discuss the polit ico over dinner. >> we love having people to discuss politico over dinner. and we try to shall did --.

>> rose: so move back to chicago if you don't like it. >> right. and we can easily start a chicago edition of playbook for him as well. our readers wanted to know that he was going be on jay leno tonight and without he was going to be on with. we often will get an advance look at a taped tv show, an advance look at magazines, books. and so trying to get people ahead of what others are going to be covering. so little data mining to give people the ten things that they want to know out of the million things that are in their in-bock. people don't want to read more but they will read something that they trust and that will give them a good handle on their day. >> rose: axelrod is on leno tonight or you just made that story of something that happened in the last week or so. >> if they say it in "politico" it's so. and david axle roll-- axelrod -- >> you were going to spread the word that he is on leno tonight, i suspect so. >> let me talk about washington, a moment in terms it of what the story that are there.

tell me what you think the biggest story today is obama and financial regulation or is it something wider, more sort of fills so-- philosophical. >> the wider story is that obama may be on his way to his rush more moment. if he gets as it looks like might happen a big republican vote for regulatory reform, for all the people who were saying he wasn't getting anything done, that he was jimmy carter, if he gets health care and wall street reform within a month of each other an astonishing accomplishment, and that's where things seem to be headed as soon as sunday, we could have a deal announced on banking reform. just as the white house started calling it health reform, insurance reform, they've now rebranded financial regulatory reform as wall street reform because it test better, sounds better and certainly a great issue for them going into november. >> rose: who's go to be the first person to leave the obama administration. >> the next person may well

be the budget director peter or zag. one of the features in playbook as you know is spotted. who is having dinner around town. whose's kindl was broken on the shuttle. who was trying to hail a cab and couldn't find one. and we got a very fascinating spotted few weeks ago and that was that while all the other top administration officials were in the east room for the president's bill signing with health care the budget director peter or zag, one of the first people in the administration to push health care, we thought it was really his baby, he was by himself at another building across town which is basically the overflow crowd where the president was going to do a pep rally after the bill planning. he was sitting by himself, waiting for the event to start. and people started e-mailing me and said something's odd about this. either he's on the outs, unhappy with them, they're unhappy with him. and sure enough bloomberg

news said he told the president he wants to leave and the president is trying to get him to stay. >> rose: why wasn't he there. it sounds like a damn good question for me. why wasn't he there for the signing because he had been out front. >> he was at the overflow room. there were a lot of noncongressional people who had worked on it. and he was working with them, congratulating them. but it was a sign that things were not the way they usually work and you read these campaign books that tell all is after. you go back and look in your notes. when something doesn't look right, when something changes, when there is something different about the set, about the motorcade, about the candid schedule there almost always a good reason for it and that is what turned out to be the case here. >> why does he want to leave, ken said. >> i think we're going to see a lot of top officials leave. he's been through a couple budget cycles. i think after november. washington is going to look very different. i can tell you top democrats are very convinced that they may have a republican house. certainly would change the terrain here.

i ran into spotted i spotted michael verone and he told me, he painted a fascinating scenario for me. he said that it's possible to game out a scenario where this november you get a republican house an a democratic senate and in 2012 you get a republican senate and a democratic house. so it's a bull market for "politico". >> rose: and for me too. >> and for charlie rose. >> rose: exactly right. that's why it's so successful. he's got a million stringers out there. people are telling him stories because they know that's the place they'd like to see the information that they have passed on. >> don't forget it's also the technology. the internet makes all of that possible. it's a two-way medium. it's easy to communicate with mike. mike is very accessible. and it is a very important thing. one of the things, actually it is a love-hate relationship that the white house has with mike and "politico". because on the one hand they

love trying to get their spin out to mike and trying to set the agenda through "politico". on the other hand one of the frustrations that obama has and he constantly talks about t he worries about the drama critics. the people are constantly who is up, who is out, why is peter or zag not in the meeting room. he calls that and as people sometimes call that gossip. and there is this tension between on the one hand loving and appreciating the importance of "politico", on the other hand having some resentment for it. do you agree with that, mike? >> well, of course but for years and years president obama, now president obama benefited from the drama critics. and now they have some uncomfortable moments. but "politico" is there in good times and bad. we cover the white house with more people, more coverage than anyone. and because of that, we do catch the ups, the downs. people will say well why don't you just wait to see how it ends. people don't go to the end of the baseball game. our readers want to see

every inning and we're there for every pitch. >> rose: so what is the one question you most want answered. what is the one thing that you think about every night. >> i think about what are people going to be talking about a day from now. what is "time" magazine going to put on their cover a week from now. what is going to be on the cover of next sunday's "new york times" who is charlie rose going to be trying to book. what is ken aulette's next book going to be about. i try and think ahead of what people are going to be interested in. then i reach out to my sources and say you can give us a little bit on this. can you give a little expert, a little remarks that that your boss is going to give. you can pain give us a link. can you maybe let us know what video you are going to pop up. and so we're able to give people a first look at things. and so what they are looking at is not a news summary but in fact a news forecast. a look ahead to what other people are going to be linking to and bloging about during the day as these million conversations that we talked about start to take place. >> mike what is the

competition you most worry about or think about. >> every person with a laptop is competition. it's very easy to, there's very low barrier to entry to this business right now. so every morning, the young people i work w i talk to them about the fact that every morning you have an opportunity to serve your audience. every morning you have a chance to do a superior job. every morning i think about how can i do this slightly bet soar it will serve the people who read it, that it won't be too long and it wouldn't be too short it wouldn't be too early, too late it won't have too much floss it won't have too much dry, boring material. so it's that recipe, it's that formula that every morning we try and get right and every morning we tray and do it slightly better because what i tell my colleagues is if we don't, someone will and should. >> rose: are you absolutely right about that. this "new york times" story is called a man the white house wakes up to.

"the new yorker" which is still on your newsstand, apple versus amazon, can the i pod conquer the kindl-- kindle and save the book publishing industry. ken's book as i have said, google, the end of the world as we know it he spent two years really inside goog el-- google. thank you. thank you, mike, pleasure to have you join us. >> where i can spot you this weekend. i need an item. i won't tell anyone. >> rose: i'll be having dinner with aulette. >> it was great to visit, happy week ebb. >> rose: thank you very much. i wish i knew. if you have any ideas, send me an e-mail. >> thank you. >> rose: thank you, mike, thank you, ken. >> back in a moment. stay with us. jining me now is alan risbridger, for the past 15 years editor of the guardian newspaper in london. i'm pleased to have him here on this program, welcome. great pleasure to have you here. >> pleased to be here. >> rose: for someone who doesn't know about the guardian, please tell them.

>>. >> in 1936 it was place mood a trust. and it's been in a trust ever since. and what that means is that the trust has a series of companies that subsidizes during half times. as you know the newspaper industrys have hard times, at the moment. but that gives us an editorial freedom and it gives us the ability to think, i think a little more long-term rses some american newspapers are looking at that time as a model. >> yes, they like the idea until they learn you have to give away your ownership of the paper to make it work. it is a great idea. because it does give you a complete editorial freedom. and it means your only relationship is with your readers. you don't have a pry pry terror anybody that can tell wah to think. >> rose: put it in some kind of perspective as you might say the times or other british newspapers. >> well, on-line we're now

just tucked behind "the new york times" as the second biggest english language newspaper in the world. so we got 37 million users, about a third of them in america. >> rose: a third. >> we got about 12 million unique users in america. and a third in the rest of the world. so it's pretty big on-line. it's a progressive liberal whatever you like to call it paper. >> rose: on a right to left spectrum. >> and i don't know if that is what appeals to some american readers but the fact that it is a paper that is, that has a viewpoint. and it is serious, it's serious and it's international. and i think maybe american readers who feel that some american papers are withdrawing from the world find a paper that is still internationally engaged. >> rose: rupert murdoch is winning the admiration of some people in its business that might have viewed him a different way because he's had the spirit to move

forward and say content's important and you are going to have to pay for it on-line. >> yeah. >> well, good luck to him. seriously. >> rose: you think it is a fool's errand. >> well, two different questions. one is nobody has yet done it in terms of general-- doesn't mean it can't be done. but i think it's a difficult proposition but seriously, as you can make it work, then that is interesting. i think journalistically we just need to stop and think because i think journalistically, i'm not a pessimist. i think what the weather has done is miraculous in terms of information. and that newspapers should want to be open and collaborative in what they do. because that's the way the internetworks. and so i think at he a very profound statement journalistically to want to put a universal barrier between you and the way the rest of the world is going

to work. so it's a kind of sort of journalistic question which i think is fighting to be open and a business decision that says we warrant to be closed, may not be the right journal,. >> but at the same time people are stepping forward to say free, you know that there are alternatives to free. and you hear it from people like eric schmidt who is beginning to say things he wouldn't have said two years ago. >> well, i heard schmidt talk last night in washington. and actually he was using of the same language as i am using. he was saying you've got to decide who are you competing with and who you are collaborating with. and i think it's more about collaboration at the moment than competition. so to give an example you just had someone talk about the environment, the guardian has six reporters doing the environmentment but that's not enough to do the environment in the

reality. there is great content on the environment out there on the web. and so we went to the ten or 20 best web sites and said why do you sit on our platform. that way we get great content and they get access to this enormous audience so i think the collaborative possibilities of the web are the interesting ones. >> rose: so people like the guardian and "the new york times" simply say we got a platform, come sit on our platform, that's the answer? >> well. >> rose: it gives you, if you are smart and have content a place to generate more readership. >> i think of it as a mutualized newspaper. so that means we are saying to people, we have to get over this journalistic arrogance that journalists are the only people that are the authority in the world. i don't think anybody believes that now. and the most unthreatening way i can think of putting it is a theatre critic, no one is suggesting we should get rid of our theatre critic. but if you say in that audience of a thousand people on the first night, are there people who have

got interesting things to say about that performance or who might during the six month run want to say interesting things, it's a no-brainer. and so if you can open your sight up and allow other voices in, you get something that's more engaged, more involved, and actually i think journalistically better. >> rose: how would you then put the contribution of the internet to knowledge and information in the world today. >> well, it's the most profound revolution. and that is what makes me worried about people who -- i mean 2009 was a terrible year for everybody. it was a terrible year because of the recession. and we had to cope with all of the digital challenges. the technological disruption and advertising leaving the industry. so it was a terrible year. but at the end of the 2 009 to say well that didn't work, did it, let's close things off, i think is to tragically cut short what is the most interesting

potential in terms of communities informing themselves. you know n hundreds of years. i mean it is of that order, i think. >> and the ipad. >> well, i love it. >> rose: why do you love it. >> i love it, well, i think there may be talking about that sort of 400 year history of information, i think that the book publishers who over 400 years decided that the book was the ideal shape for reading and holding were on to something. and so it apple has just rediscovered what book publishers have known for a long time t is a very satisfying size. and it's a brilliant experience for weapon sites which in a way pains me. the browser experience of reading the guardian on the ipad is so good that all my ambitions have slightly, i

will have to rethink. >> explain that further. >> well ability to tell stories in a linked way to link in to all that other information that is on the web, to tell it through data, o tell it through pictures it just looks brilliant on this high resolution screen that you can carry around with you. and i don't think the guardian has ever looked better or been more functional. now that's slightly pains me because the iphone app which we launched in november we sold 120,000 of them. i think lots of people had the hope that they could, that this was going to be a treasure trove for apps. and i think it will be for book publishers but i think in terms of newspapers, it's such a brilliant experience it's not going to be the salvation. >> rose: but people like conde nast and "new york times" and "the wall street journal," i mean they are

trumpet -- trumpetting the fact that their app is the greatest thing for the ipad ever. >> yeah. >> "the new york times" which i think was put together in a hurry, like everybody else because we do not get much notice, it's fantastically retro. so it looks like a page. you can't link to anything. you can't do anything with it. you can't copy it or cut it or paste it, it's just a page. now some people look to that, one of my daughters looked to that. and said that's just brilliant. so it may be-- . >> rose: why did she say that. >> because it just, it looks, the experience of looking at text on paper as it were, is a good one it looks like reading a paper. and some people hanker for those days. so it may be -- >> your daughter does. >> weirdly enough. >> must be her dna. >> it may be that something, "the new york times" has hit

on something rather clever which is to offer a rather retro experience. and that's the app. >> rose: -- you see him on conference in this program and this is what he said about paying for content back to journalism. here it is. >> i would say the idea that free democratic information is only achievable in the digital world if everything is for free is for me web communism is a totally absurd idea because that would mean the supermarket is also only a democratic supermarket if you can get your milk and bread for free. so i think part of the content will be free because they are commodity. part of the exclusive content will be paid for and advertising financed and parts of it will be prescription models only. and that will be development of let's say ten years. >> i like the trades word communism. >> rose: i saw your eyes twij el when he said that. >> i think he's right.

to the extent there are going to be different models, payrolls work for the "the wall street journal" and the fte because they have valuable financial information that you want to get quicker than your neighbor. look, you have to accept that a newspaper in print is a completely different thing once it gets to the web. once it gets to the web there are all these sharks out there, these digital sharks with much lower cost bases who just want unbundle pits of it. if somebody wants the cultural coverage, sports coverage, and you know, again in the spirit of humility some of that they can do better than we can. so instead of fighting that, you know, their business model is to go down on their knees praying we are going to put a payroll out because they will just take our audiences. >> rose: thank you for coming it is a pleasure. what is interesting about the internet to me, and i say this, this is just a tiny little example, is that it makes the guardian, you know, for people who are genuinely curious t is a voice that you want to know,

and the internet makes it easy, easy, easy. and we didn't have that luxury five years ago. >> that for me is the miraculous thing. the guardian started as a manchester paper and it was a manchester paper until 1958. and now it's read by 37 million people around the world and that to me is what makes me hugely optimistic. there is going to be amazing difficulties ahead but i think it's the beginning of an exciting journalee. >> rose: it's great for us too. we can now compete around the world because we are accessible around the world. >> there is a lot to be frightened of. but there's an awful lot to like about this media revolution. >> thank you for coming. >> thank you for having me. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh

access.wgbh.org